Man Based Global Warming....

It's no wonder all you deniers can't hear a thing,,, with all that sand in your heads from having your heads buried so deep! I hope that when the day comes when you wake up to the reality of the world it won't be too late! If it isn't already!

The reality is that MOST of the energy/emission/conservation goals/needs can be met NOW if we are willing to pay the real cost of your energy choices. Factor in the environmental costs of coal and Pv solar already beats coal! Worried about the Square feet required for Pv,, how many acres of roofs do we build a year,, already have built? Wonder how we are going to fuel the future vehicles? How about some REAL cafe standards to pay the real cost of our transportation choices,,, or how about REAL train service and REAL mass transit. Worried about increasing energy costs to heat and cool our homes? How about spending REAL money on insulation, efficient heating/lighting etc?

My point is,,, too many of you naysayers are full of reasons that we can't/shouldn't change and you have IMHO bought the bill of goods sold to you by big energy and right wing whackos who are all so worried that "it will cost too much" or "hurt the economy" to do anything to change the status quo. The reality is that people who don't want to change usually have a financial interest in keeping the status quo.

Grow up and get your head(s) out of the sand,,, if not for yourself,, then for your children and grandchildren!

Icarus

PS Fla Prius has it dialed! Good job.

 

Not lifting a finger eh? There you go again... spouting untruths.

Clearly there is common vein in the denialist camp. Anyone who thinks Obama's policies are wrong-headed is clearly looking at the world with right-wing wacko blinders on. No surprise really - this was all explained in the climate wars podcast.

I hope you squirm and ache at every move that Obama and the rest of the world makes towards fighting climate change and regulating the hell out of the financial industry. Enjoy.

 

Since I've lived in Tennessee for many years, I'm well aware of the TVA. It is absolutely unforgivable that the TVA has not been privatized many, many years ago. One of the worst offenders when it comes to meeting high standards of any sort (financial, environmental, etc.) is a government run operations trying to be a commercial operation. The only thing that they are good at is avoiding responsibility for poor performance. This is a very good example of where the "free" market is much better than government controlled markets.

It's critical to point out that the Oil Embargo occurred during his term and he did not create that situation and most of the resulting economic ripples. While not very effective, his efforts to shift some of the focus of the "Energy Department" from nuclear weapons to alternative energy was a good thing. I'll leave it to FHoP discussions for other aspects of his term, but this particular shifting of money from bomb building to energy sources is to his credit.

 

Sorry for going OT, but -

You seem incapable of realizing how much you have to be modest about. I'm afraid the ignorance is on your side, sir, especially in the area of economics.

Carter's building of shelter for poor people is certainly admirable, but he is an anti-semite by all accounts and was a terrible president, one of the worst.

Obama will prove to be the most reckless and destructive president in history. Much worse than even Carter. The policies and programs he has put into effect in just four months have already assured crippling debt for future generations. How in the world do you think the trillions, TRILLIONS we are borrowing and printing will be repaid? Through taxes and inflation. This congress and this Marxist president are out of control. Your children and grandchildren will be paying for it in ways we can only imagine. Best thing, my nice person.

 

You get a gold star for hypocrisy ufourya. Where were you when bush et al were on a debt spending spree to buy tax breaks, fool's wars, and the pharma insustry in the form of medicare part D ?

Republicans simply do not have any legitimacy after the past eight years.

 

Wow! now you're going off the deep end...

 

Please. Nowhere have I indicated that I approved of excessive government spending, regardless of the administration in power.

How can Obama claim that our economic debt he inherited be lessened by borrowing more?

...Let's see. From 2010 to 2019, Obama projects annual deficits totaling $7.1 trillion; that's atop the $1.8 trillion deficit for 2009. By 2019, the ratio of publicly held federal debt to gross domestic product (GDP, or the economy) would reach 70 percent, up from 41 percent in 2008. That would be the highest since 1950 (80 percent). The Congressional Budget Office, using less optimistic economic forecasts, raises these estimates. The 2010-19 deficits would total $9.3 trillion; the debt-to-GDP ratio in 2019 would be 82 percent.
But wait: Even these totals may be understated. By various estimates, Obama's health plan might cost $1.2 trillion over a decade; Obama has budgeted only $635 billion. Next, the huge deficits occur despite a pronounced squeeze of defense spending. From 2008 to 2019, total federal spending would rise 75 percent, but defense spending would increase only 17 percent. Unless foreign threats recede, military spending and deficits might both grow.
Except from crabby Republicans, these astonishing numbers have received little attention -- a tribute to Obama's Zen-like capacity to discourage serious criticism. Everyone's fixated on the present economic crisis, which explains and justifies big deficits (lost revenue, anti-recession spending) for a few years. Hardly anyone notes that huge deficits continue indefinitely...
washingtonpost.com

And.

...Over 10 years, President Obama would raise taxes by an average $300,000 apiece for the 3.2 million individuals and small businesses with the highest incomes. With the economy already in recession, this is downright reckless; President Hoover's tax increases, after all, helped turn a recession into the Great Depression. And delaying these tax increases until 2011 won't stop forward-looking businesses from immediately scaling back any investment and hiring plans in anticipation of the painful tax bite.

Everyone else's taxes would rise, too. Despite his promise that "if your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat: not one single dime," the president has proposed an (at least) $646 billion cap-and-trade energy tax. This would immediately be passed onto all consumers at a cost that could average anywhere from $650 to $2,000 per household annually...
Obama budget would double the national debt

And.

...In the first independent analysis of Obama's budget proposal, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office concluded that Obama's policies would cause government spending to swell above historic levels even after costly programs to ease the recession and stabilize the nation's financial system have ended.
Tax collections, meanwhile, would lag well behind spending, producing huge annual budget deficits that would force the nation to borrow nearly $9.3 trillion over the next decade -- $2.3 trillion more than the president predicted when he unveiled his budget request just one month ago...
U.S. Budget Deficit to Balloon, CBO Says - washingtonpost.com

So, you're saying that Obama will have even less legitimacy than Bush - and I agree - much less.

 

I'm not alone in my assessment of

[FONT=times new roman,times]Jimmy Carter: (1977-1981)[/FONT]


[FONT=times new roman,times]Few would deny Mr. Carter's place in infamy. I will confine myself to his actual time in office, although Jimmy Carter arguably has actually been as [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]detrimental[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times] to freedom, democracy and the American ideal as during his catastrophic tenure. [/FONT]


[FONT=times new roman,times]Many historians rank him around the mid 20s[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times], some liberal publications place him even in the top 20, and some conservatives in the low 30s. But these are 1980s and 90s ratings. It no doubt takes two post-presidential decades for more complete observations, as we saw with President Reagan, and will likely see with President Bush, [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]depending upon the successor[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]. [/FONT]



[FONT=times new roman,times]One absurd decision, considered "controversial" by even his ardent supporters, was the final negotiation and signature of the "Panama Canal Treaties" in September 1977. Those treaties, which essentially would transfer control of the American-built Panama Canal to the nation of Panama, were bitterly opposed by a majority of the American public. The treaties transferred a great strategic American asset - one that nearly 30,000 men died while constructing it over a decade -- to a corrupt third-world military dictatorship. Mr. Carter could not care less.[/FONT]


[FONT=times new roman,times]America's worst president also terminated the Russian wheat deal, which was intended to establish trade with USSR and lessen Cold War tensions. Even as a former farmer, Carter didn't value the grain exports, which would have been beneficial to many people employed in agriculture. This embargo marked the beginning of terrible hardship for American farmers. [/FONT]


[FONT=times new roman,times]If all that were not tragic enough, the main conflict between human rights and U.S. interests came in Carter's dealings with the [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]Shah of Iran[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]. Though Carter's presidency was marked by several major crises, the final year of his term arguably was his worst. It was dominated by the Iran Hostage Crisis, during which the United States struggled to rescue diplomats and American citizens held hostage in Tehran, paving the way for the rise of Radical Islam now threatening the free world. [/FONT]


[FONT=times new roman,times]The Shah had been a strong ally of America since World War II. He was also friendly to the Jews of Israel, an idea subsequently non-existent in Iran for more than three decades now. Al Qaeda and the Taliban did not exist and Radical Islam lacked a major state sponsor. Shah Reza Pahlavi was one of the "twin pillars" upon which U.S. strategic policy in the Middle East was built. [/FONT]


[FONT=times new roman,times]When the [/FONT][ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Revolution"][FONT=times new roman,times]Iranian Revolution[/FONT][/ame][FONT=times new roman,times] broke out, the Shah was overthrown, and the U.S. did not intervene. The Shah, in permanent exile, was refused entry to the United States by the Carter administration, even on grounds of medical emergency. Nearly a year later, Washington relented and admitted the Shah into the U.S. Gaining strength and confidence, Iranian militants seized the American embassy in Tehran, taking 52 Americans hostage.[/FONT]


[FONT=times new roman,times]The Shah died a few months later in Egypt, but the hostage crisis continued, dominating the last year of Carter's presidency and putting his misguided policies on display for the world to see, embarrassing America in the process. Carter's response was to do nothing at first. He simply stayed inside the White House. Then he attempted a rescue he closely managed, which failed. (Contrast this to[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times] President Bush after 9-11[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times], though he was [/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]still criticized in the press[/FONT][FONT=times new roman,times]). The redeeming factor in this telling ordeal was Carter's crushing defeat by Ronald Reagan in the presidential election. [/FONT]


[FONT=times new roman,times]The hostages were released on January 20, 1981 moments after Ronald Reagan was sworn in as the 40th President of the USA. Carter's greatest achievement was leaving office.[/FONT]
The American Thinker

...At the time, a senior Iranian diplomat in Washington observed, "President Carter betrayed the Shah and helped create the vacuum that will soon be filled by Soviet-trained agents and religious fanatics who hate America." Under the guise of promoting" human rights," Carter made demands on the Shah while blackmailing him with the threat that if the demands weren't fulfilled, vital military aid and training would be withheld. This strange policy, carried out against a staunch, 20 year Middle East ally, was a repeat of similar policies applied in the past by US governments to other allies such as pre Mao China and pre Castro Cuba.
[...]
Khomeini was allowed to seize power in Iran and, as a result, we are now reaping the harvest of anti-American fanaticism and extremism. Khomeini unleashed the hybrid of Islam and Marxism that has spawned suicide bombers and hijackers. President Jimmy Carter, and the extremists in his administration are to blame and should be held accountable...
Jimmy Carter, you want to see the worst president in history? Look in the mirror (Wizbang)

 

Freedom? Have you read The Patriot Act?

Economic stability? ound:

Not lifting a finger? Thanks. I'm sure the families who've lost members in Afghanistan will be happy to hear that.

 

$1.3 trillion deficit. Need I say more.

 

What freedoms have you personally lost because of the Patriot Act? And with all due respect to the few Canadians serving - I'd bet Fibber is against sending any to Afghanistan - or anywhere else for that matter - anyway. Do you think it is just coincidence that Freedom house found only 27% of countries were "free" in 1977 vs. 47% today? What country do you suspect led the efforts to nearly double freedom around the world? Canada? The Europeans? Puhleese.

And as tough as current economic conditions are, the US is still arguably one of the most stable economies in the world. Hard to say how we'll rate once Obama is done with things though.

 

Yes. You need to say it is deficit spending to (hopefully) exit the recession/depression the bush era caused.

 

I was no fan of Bush's spending either. But Obama brings reckless spending to unprecedented levels. I thought Barry was going to "eliminate earmarks" and "go through the budget line by line". Yeah, right. I suppose you believe in the tooth fairy too, Sage.

PS - whatever happened to "Paygo". LOL.

 

What about Reagan's deficit spending? Republicans haven't been fiscally conservative in decades.

What got us out of the great depression? WW2. What was WW2? A masssive gov't spending and jobs program.

 

I think the psychology of winning WW2 was as important as the massive govt spending.

 

Yes you do. You need to admit that it's Bush's fault. I never seen such a pack of mis-informed right-wing nut jobs.

CentreRight: Comrade Bush: The Most Big Government US President since World War II

Note that Bush never included all his biggest spending boondoggles in his budget numbers. He spent recklessly and hid it to boot. Nice job.

 

Wrong again dummy.

 

It's possible, but probably also possible to prove, so it's really only speculation. The US was in quite a bit of debt... but probably to it's own citizens not the Chinese. My point is that republicans have a history of massive spending and gov't waste. It's just for different things (military industrial complex vs social programmes).

 

So both parties like to spend? Right on.

 

Won't argue with that in the least. There nothing wrong with spending if it's sustainable and achieves a desirable end. Nobody seems to understand the sustainable part, however.